[vtk-developers] [Paraview-developers] Moving vtkMemberFunctionCommand to VTK

[Marcus D. Hanwell]

I was about to ask if a static_cast would work in this case, and it seems
preferable (and equivalent to) a C-style cast. I was just looking at the new
API, and it looks great to me. I think this is a great addition to our C++
API, and am very much in favor of making it slicker where we can.

Marcus

On Wed, Oct 6, 2010 at 9:25 AM, David Gobbi <david.gobbi at gmail.com> wrote:

> I was wondering about that dynamic_cast but I thought there
> was a reason for it... but I can change it to a static_cast
> for my commit.
>
> So I'll stage and commit as soon as I can afford a full VTK
> rebuild.
>
>  David
>
> On Wed, Oct 6, 2010 at 7:06 AM, Utkarsh Ayachit
> <utkarsh.ayachit at kitware.com> wrote:
> > I like your changes. In absence of your changes, if a developer does
> > indeed want to achieve same effect he'll be doing something similar
> > and will indeed have the onus of worrying about dangling ptrs. So I
> > don't think this makes it any more confusing. We should probably add
> > documentation to that effect and that pretty much should do it.
> >
> > About the dynamic_cast, yea static_cast should be fine too and totally
> > safe in this case. If the developer was stupid enough to pass in a ptr
> > as a wrong type when making the AddObserver call, he deserves the side
> > effects :).
> >
> > I'd vote for committing your changes. (You should use the stage, add
> > your commit to the "member_function_observers" branch and then merge
> > it in).
> >
> > Utkarsh
> >
> > On Wed, Oct 6, 2010 at 8:24 AM, David Gobbi <david.gobbi at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >> On Wed, Oct 6, 2010 at 6:01 AM, David Doria <daviddoria at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> David G,
> >>>
> >>> Are you suggesting this in place of what Utkarsh pushed? Utkarsh, can
> >>> you take a look and let David G know if he should push it? I think it
> >>> is a good idea to allow event handling from as many places as possible
> >>> (i.e. I support NOT requiring the class to derive from vtkObjectBase).
> >>
> >> I'm just putting it out for discussion.  It does come with some danger,
> >> for example you should not use it instead of vtkEventQtSlotConnect,
> >> because Qt's signal/slot mechanism is safe, and this is not.  It's only
> >> safe when the listener is a vtkObjectBase class.
> >>
> >>  David
> >>
> > _______________________________________________
> > Powered by www.kitware.com
> >
> > Visit other Kitware open-source projects at
> http://www.kitware.com/opensource/opensource.html
> >
> > Follow this link to subscribe/unsubscribe:
> > http://www.vtk.org/mailman/listinfo/vtk-developers
> >
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Powered by www.kitware.com
>
> Visit other Kitware open-source projects at
> http://www.kitware.com/opensource/opensource.html
>
> Follow this link to subscribe/unsubscribe:
> http://www.vtk.org/mailman/listinfo/vtk-developers
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://public.kitware.com/pipermail/vtk-developers/attachments/20101006/d87a3c9a/attachment.html>